§

Meat and Highway Drivers, Etc., Local No. 710

143 N.L.R.B. 1221 (N.L.R.B. 1963)
Meat and Highway Drivers, Etc., Local No. 710

14 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Denver Bldg. Council

    341 U.S. 675 (1951)   Cited 494 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming Board's assertion of jurisdiction over activities taking place at local construction site based on finding that "any widespread application of the practices charged might well result in substantially decreasing" the flow of interstate commerce

  2. Electrical Workers v. Labor Board

    366 U.S. 667 (1961)   Cited 186 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union may picket a secondary employer only when the primary employer is at the job site

  3. Carpenters' Union v. Labor Board

    357 U.S. 93 (1958)   Cited 201 times
    Rejecting Government position that we should defer to the Board's interpretation of the Interstate Commerce Act

  4. Teamsters Union v. Oliver

    358 U.S. 283 (1959)   Cited 166 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Teamsters v. Oliver, 358 U.S. 283 (1959), we held that a state antitrust law could not be used to challenge an employer-union agreement. Justice White's opinion in Jewel Tea explains, however, that Oliver held only that "[a]s the agreement did not embody a `"remote and indirect approach to the subject of wages'... but a direct frontal attack upon a problem thought to threaten the maintenance of the basic wage structure established by the collective bargaining contract,' [358 U.S.], at 294, the paramount federal policy of encouraging collective bargaining proscribed application of the state law.

  5. Retail Clerks Union Local 770 v. N.L.R.B

    296 F.2d 368 (D.C. Cir. 1961)   Cited 26 times

    No. 15862. Argued March 2, 1961. Decided July 6, 1961. Petition for Rehearing Denied August 23, 1961. Mr. Tim L. Bornstein, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. S.G. Lippman, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. Melvin J. Welles, Washington, D.C., of the bar of the Court of Appeals of New York, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Mr. Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Mr. Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., and Mr. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen

  6. District No. 9 v. N.L.R.B

    315 F.2d 33 (D.C. Cir. 1962)   Cited 24 times

    No. 16901. Argued September 27, 1962. Decided November 15, 1962. Mr. Bernard Dunau, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Plato E. Papps, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. Melvin J. Welles, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, of the bar of the Court of Appeals of New York, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Messrs. Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, National Labor Relations

  7. East Bay Un. of Machinists v. N.L.R.B

    322 F.2d 411 (D.C. Cir. 1963)   Cited 19 times

    Nos. 17275, 17468. Argued April 29, 1963. Decided July 3, 1963. Petitions for Rehearing Before the Division Denied September 27, 1963. Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied September 27, 1963. Mr. Jerry D. Anker, Washington, D.C., with whom Messrs. David E. Feller, Elliot Bredhoff, and Michael H. Gottesman, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for petitioners in No. 17275 and intervenors in No. 17468. Mr. Marion B. Plant, San Francisco, Cal., with whom Mr. Gerard D. Reilly, Washington, D.C., was

  8. N.L.R.B. v. AMALGAMATED LITHOGRAPHERS OF AM

    309 F.2d 31 (9th Cir. 1962)   Cited 19 times
    In NLRB v. Amalgamated Lithographers of America, 309 F.2d 31, 51 LRRM 2093 (9th Cir. 1962), cert. denied 372 U.S. 943, 82 S.Ct. 936, 9 L.Ed.2d 968 (1963), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a union committed an unfair labor practice in refusing to bargain in good faith when the union insisted upon the inclusion of an illegal contract provision.

  9. Bakery Wagon Drivers, No. 484 v. N.L.R.B

    321 F.2d 353 (D.C. Cir. 1963)   Cited 18 times

    No. 17200. Argued March 20, 1963. Decided May 23, 1963. Mr. Duane B. Beeson, San Francisco, Cal., of the bar of the Supreme Court of California, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Mr. Mozart G. Ratner, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. Hans J. Lehmann, Atty., N.L.R.B., with whom Messrs. Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, and Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., were on the brief, for respondent. Before DANAHER

  10. Los Angeles Mailers Union No. 9, v. N.L.R.B

    311 F.2d 121 (D.C. Cir. 1962)   Cited 16 times

    No. 16887. Argued September 27, 1962. Decided October 25, 1962. Rehearing Denied December 6, 1962. Mr. George Kaufmann, Washington, D.C., with whom Messrs. Gerhard P. Van Arkel, Washington, D.C., and Stephen Reinhardt, Los Angeles, Cal., were on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. Hans J. Lehmann, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, with whom Messrs. Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, and Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, National Labor Relations